Author Topic: Michael Jackson Trial??? (Read 3707 times)

Werewolf · « **on:** May 26, 2005, 04:19:45 AM »

Well - the defense rested. So what's the verdict?

Is MJ a low life perverted child molester or the victim of a greedy mother using her son to shake him down.

My gut tells me he's guilty.

I'm no fan of MJ. The guy's just - weird. A child in a - well - kinda man's body. A black guy who tried desperately to turn him self into a white guy.

But if I was on the jury there'd be enough reasonable doubt that I would grudgingly have to vote to acquit.

What say you?

BillBlank · « **Reply #1 on:** May 26, 2005, 05:12:05 AM »

No fan of MJ here either, wrong in many ways. It's not yet a crime to be a weirdo however and given the fact that the last case was settled out of court for a tidy sum, my gut says it's a shakedown in the hope of similar rewards.

As an aside, what kind of parent places their child in such a vulnerable position? If MJ is guilty the parents are little better than pimps, given that they would have been well aware of the previous allegations.

A sorry mess all round.

Not guilty here - not enough proof.

TarpleyG · « **Reply #2 on:** May 26, 2005, 06:16:19 AM »

Based on what I know from the media spoon-feed machine, there is not enough evidence to convict him. Now, I was not in the courtroom so I cannot say how it will go but my "gut" tells me he is guilty to some degree.

Greg

Typhoon · « **Reply #3 on:** May 26, 2005, 06:45:06 AM »

I agree with the previous posts. Weirdo? Without question. Diddled little boys? Most probably. Accuser and family were angels? Not hardly. Enough evidence to convict and send this "frail artist" to the jug for a number of years? Probably not.

I would just like to stop hearing about this case night after night after night. When I am driving to and from work, just give me the relevant news and the traffic reports. Enough already!

Sean Smith · « **Reply #4 on:** May 26, 2005, 06:51:50 AM »

Well, there is the verdict, and then there is actual guilt or innocence.

Odds he will be found not guilty? High.
Do I think he in fact engaged in some form of sexual deviance with a minor? Yes, there is alot of anecdotal evidence of this being the case presented in the media.
Do I think he has gone as far as forcibly raping small children? Maybe, but I haven't seen any evidence of that presented in the media.
Do I think the media is necessarily reliable? Nope. But I don't think it has done a blatant hatchet job on MJ either.

Waitone · « **Reply #5 on:** May 26, 2005, 07:05:31 AM »

I want to know why the judge didn't throw it out of court. When you have the prosecution surprised by what its witnesses say, you've got something wrong. I tend to think the prosecution was conducting some kind jihad against MJ. Yea, he is wierd but so what? I don't think he is guilty of what he is being charged with. He may well be guilty of something else but not these charges.

Sindawe · « **Reply #6 on:** May 26, 2005, 10:06:50 PM »

Who is this "Michael Jackson" fellow, and why should I spend energy comtemplating him?

bountyhunter · « **Reply #7 on:** May 27, 2005, 02:49:12 PM »

Quote from: Werewolf

Well - the defense rested. So what's the verdict?

Is MJ a low life perverted child molester or the victim of a greedy mother using her son to shake him down.

My gut tells me he's guilty.

My brain tells me he's guilty. You don't cough uo $25 MILLION in hush money if you aren't guilty of something.

bountyhunter · « **Reply #8 on:** May 27, 2005, 02:51:12 PM »

Quote from: Waitone

I tend to think the prosecution was conducting some kind jihad against MJ. Yea, he is wierd but so what? .

You've got four different independent sources with no axe to grind verifying MJ had "Jesus juice" (WINE) put into coke cans to give to kids. You have no problem with that?

thorn · « **Reply #9 on:** May 27, 2005, 06:20:35 PM »

MJ, Ugh! at best, the guy is so nuts he doesnt even know what he's doing is wrong, but the "jesus juice" etc , which does seem well supported as evidence- hard t obelieve there wasnt something funny in ole MJ's mind there.
i vote perv.

Bemidjiblade · « **Reply #10 on:** May 28, 2005, 02:47:17 PM »

I can't wait for this to be over, but I am starting to think it'll be like the the OJ trials way back when.
There isn't a doubt in my mind that Jackson's got sexual attractions to children.
But he's not on trial for his sexual deviance, but for whether or not he committed a certain action because of them.
Sigh...
I guess I can't find a guy guilty just because me makes my stomach roll over.
I'd have to go with not guilty. The prosecution simply hasn't met the burden of proof, and I can't stomach throwing out "innocent until proven guilty" just 'cause I think someone deserves to be monitored for a very very long time...

Guest · « **Reply #11 on:** June 02, 2005, 03:30:42 AM »

At first i was all set to say he was guilty. However, the more i hear about the case, the less guilty it seems. The fact that the mother has a HISTORY of using her children to make money abusing the legal system is pretty damning. The whole JC Penny's debacle was enough for me. How many times can one family sue because someone with deep pockets molested their child before people start to wonder?

Nathaniel Firethorn · « **Reply #12 on:** June 02, 2005, 06:42:00 AM »

I think America has been tried by the media, found guilty of indecent mawkishness, and sentenced to a dose of MJ's private life every day until it repents.

- NF

Smith · « **Reply #13 on:** June 03, 2005, 04:58:14 AM »

I don't own a TV. Would anyone do me a favor and list the items of evidence? I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

Schuey2002 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 13, 2005, 11:36:51 AM »

We are only a few minutes away from the verdict being read in court..

Paddy · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2005, 11:40:37 AM »

Verdict pending shortly. Only reason I care (a little) is because I work in Santa Maria.

Schuey2002 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2005, 12:19:06 PM »

He was found not guilty on all charges..

jefnvk · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2005, 12:19:33 PM »

I think this and the whole Scott Peterson thing is being blown out of proportion. The media trying to make a buck.

I have no interest in hearing about MJ every day. Is he a weirdo? Yeah. I think the whole white skin thing proves that. Was he probably guilty of some wrongdoings? Yes. Was the parents probably equally at fault? I would say so.

Actually, Sean summed it up pretty well for me.

Well, not as soon as I had typed that, I see he is innocent on all counts. From what I have seen in the trial, probably the right choice.

Nathaniel Firethorn · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2005, 12:27:47 PM »

This will be beaten to death on the teevee nooz for about two days and then be decently buried. Until he does it again...

- NF

Sean Smith · « **Reply #19 on:** June 13, 2005, 01:20:48 PM »

Apparently, from what little I absorbed by accident Shocked

, the prosecution was pretty incompetent. Looks like they got the courtroom beating they had coming to them.

Silver Bullet · « **Reply #20 on:** June 14, 2005, 04:11:33 AM »

Is Michael a Democrat ?

InfidelSerf · « **Reply #21 on:** June 14, 2005, 05:17:47 AM »

Quote

given the fact that the last case was settled out of court for a tidy sum

I'm sorry but the shear fact that he paid $20,000,000 to settle an accusation of child molestation is evidence enough for me to say he's guilty as sin.

If I were worth what he is. I'd pay 3 times that to prove my innocence.

An innocent man does not settle out of court on charges like that. You only settle if your accused of some white collar crime like insider trading.

Chuck Jennings · « **Reply #22 on:** June 14, 2005, 10:07:44 AM »

Quote

"Is MJ a low life perverted child molester or the victim of a greedy mother using her son to shake him down?"

Both.

News:

Author Topic: Michael Jackson Trial??? (Read 3707 times)

Guest

Paddy